DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to an amendment filed on 2/17/2026. As directed by the amendment, claims 1, 4-5, 11-12, 16-17 and 20 were amended, claim 2 was cancelled and no new claims were added. Thus, claims 1 and 3-20 are presently pending in this application.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: the limitation “a de-misting system in fluid communication with the orifice, wherein the de-misting system is configured to supply a de-misting gas from a gas source to the interior of the goggles via the orifice” (claim 16, lines 4-6, the term “system” is a generic placeholder and the function is “de-misting” and “configured to supply a de-misting gas from a gas source to the interior of the goggles via the orifice”) and “a de-misting system” (claim 20, line 1, the term “system” is a generic placeholder and the function is “de-misting”).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
It is noted that the limitation “the de-misting system” in claim 17 and its dependency no longer invokes 112(f) because there is sufficient structures for the de-misting system being claimed in claim 17.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
A de-misting system: de-misting system 104, which includes a supply connector 122, a de-mist tube 124, and a diffuser 126, see paragraph 0032 of the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 20, the limitation “the first harness point” (claim 20, line 4) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu (CN 111743690).
PNG
media_image1.png
913
920
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses a de-misting system for goggles (entire system in fig. 1 minus the goggles (100, 110, 120)), the de-misting system comprising: a supply connector (201, see fig. 1, paragraphs 0013-0014, 0041 and 0048 of the English translation) connectable to a de-misting gas source (400 comprising 200, fig. 1, paragraphs 0047-0050); a de-mist tube (the tube between 122 and 201, see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above) in fluid communication with the supply connector (see fig. 1, paragraphs 0047-0050); and a diffuser (140 having diffusion port 141, fig. 2, paragraphs 0041 and 0048-0049) in fluid communication with the de-mist tube (figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 0047-0050), wherein the diffuser (140) is configured to couple to a first harness point of the goggles to supply a de-misting gas to an interior volume of the goggles (see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above with reference to fig. 2, as shown, the harness point is the point where 140 is attached to the cover 120 since the point is responsible for supporting the diffuser to allow the diffuser to harness the gas and then release the gas through the diffuser, alternatively, the harness point can be the point where 130 is connected to 120, which would make the diffuser to be coupled to the harness point indirectly, it is noted that the claim does not claim that the diffuser is directly couple to the harness point)(see figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 0047-0049).
Regarding claim 10, Wu discloses that the supply connector (201) comprises a tee connector comprising a main passage and a branch passage and wherein the de-mist tube is attached to the branch passage of the connector (see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above).
Claims 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yin (CN 111317935).
PNG
media_image2.png
1095
857
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Yin discloses a mask system (entire system in fig. 4) comprising: goggles (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, see paragraphs 0041 and 0045, Yin discloses a protective goggles) comprising a lens (the lens is 4, see paragraph 0032) defining an interior volume and a first harness point (the opening ) providing access to the interior volume (see paragraphs 0032-0042 and 0045, Yin discloses that the goggles comprises an orifice for accommodating the valve of the diffuser 19 and 27, the orifice is a harness point because it allows the attachment of the diffuser 19/27 to the goggles because the point is being utilized to support tubing 14, alternatively, the point where the orifice is being utilized to harness air/gas into the goggles, therefore, is a harness point); and a de-misting system (entire system in fig. 4 minus the goggles, see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, see paragraphs 0041 and 0045) in fluid communication with the first harness point, wherein the de-misting system is configured to supply a de-misting gas from a gas source (15, 34, 16, 17 and 18 adjacent to 17, fig. 7, paragraphs 0036 and 0045) to the interior volume of the goggles via the first harness point (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above).
Regarding claim 19, Yin discloses that the mask system is a respirator (see fig. 4 and paragraph 0038, the mask allows the user to breathe in filtered air via filter 18 in fig. 4, paragraph 0036, therefore, is a respirator system, see paragraph 0038 of Yin).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (CN 111743690) in view of Rice (GB 2404841).
Regarding claim 3, Wu fails to disclose that the diffuser is configured to supply the demisting gas with a laminar flow across an interior surface of the goggles.
However, Rice teaches that a gas outlet (outlet of 54, figs. 1 and 3) and a demisting gas source (fan 42, fig. 1) has a speed that is low enough to promote laminar flow across the lens (12, figs. 1 and 3 and page 11, line 17 to page 12, line 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diffuser and the de-misting gas source of Wu to produce a laminar flow across the lens as taught by Rice for the purpose of providing a comfortable air flow that is effective in aiding the evaporation and removal from sweat from the wearer’s face (see page 11, line 17 to page 12, line 16 of Rice).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (CN 111743690) in view of Legrand (FR 2556227).
Regarding claim 7, Wu fails to disclose that the diffuser further comprises a check valve.
However, Legrand teaches a diffuser (6, 7, figs. 1-3) comprising a check valve (8, figs. 2-3, see paragraphs 0003 and 0004-0005, the flap moves when the flow leaves 6/7, however, if the is no flow leaving 6/7, the flap 8 would close the opening formed by the diffuser 6/7, therefore, the flap 8 is acting as a check valve).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diffuser of Wu to be the diffuser having the check valve as taught by Legrand for the purpose of providing a diffuser that would prevent fogging/misting of the goggle while providing comfort to the wearer by not blowing the gas towards the user eyes (see paragraph 0004 of Legrand).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (CN 111743690) in view of Li (CN 111228038).
Regarding claim 8, Wu discloses a de-mist supply tube of a pair of de-mist tubes (see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above), but fails to disclose that the de-mist tube further comprises a control valve for controlling a flow of the de-misting gas from the gas source to the diffuser.
However, Li teaches a de-mist tube (9, fig. 1, paragraphs 0020 and 0023-0025 of the English translation) comprises a control valve (16, fig. 1) for controlling a flow of the de-misting gas from the gas source to the diffuser (see first air valve 16 in paragraphs 0020 and 0025).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pair of de-mist tubes of Wu to have a valve as taught by Li for the purpose of providing controllability to allow the user to control the flow of de-misting gas when needed (see paragraph 0025 of Li).
Claims 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (CN 111743690) in view of Yin (CN 111317935).
Regarding claim 11, Wu discloses goggles comprises a lens defining an interior volume and an orifice (orifice where the diffuser 120 and 122 is connected to, see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above) providing access to the interior volume (the lens is 110, fig. 1, paragraph 0049, even though the translation use the term “mirror”, in the context of the invention being a goggle and is for preventing fogging locally and affecting the vision, 110 would be a lens of the goggles), the diffuser is couple to the orifice of the goggles (see fig. 1, the diffuser is coupled to the orifice of the goggles, see paragraphs 0048-0049), but fails to disclose a mask system.
However, Yin teaches a de-misting system for goggles (entire system in fig. 4 minus the goggles, see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, see paragraphs 0041 and 0045, Yin discloses a protective goggles), the de-misting system comprising: a supply connector (see the connector formed by 21, see fig. 4, paragraph 0038 of the English translation) connectable to a de-misting gas source (15, 34, 16, 17 and 18 adjacent to 17, fig. 7, paragraphs 0036 and 0045); a de-mist tube (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above with reference to 14, paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0038) in fluid communication with the supply connector (see fig. 4); and a diffuser (see valve 19 and 27 at 9, fig. 4, paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0038, the one way valve acts a diffuser because it allows the opening and closing of the orifice, to flow through a check valve, the valve must allow for the closed position to take place during equalization of pressure on both side, once the valve is open, the valve is acting as a diffuser to diffuse through the valve since the gas leaving the valve would be spread out) in fluid communication with the de-mist tube (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above), wherein the diffuser is configured to couple to an orifice of the goggles to supply a de-misting gas to an interior volume of the goggles (see paragraphs 0010, 0016, 0032-0038 and 0045). Yin discloses a mask system (entire system in fig. 4) comprising: goggles (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, see paragraphs 0041 and 0045) comprising a lens defining an interior volume and an orifice providing an access to the interior volume and the de-misting system of claim 1, wherein the diffuser is coupled to the orifice of the goggles (see paragraphs 0032-0042 and 0045, Yin discloses that the goggles comprises an orifice for accommodating the valve of the diffuser 19 and 27). Yin discloses a mask portion (18 comprising 8 and chamber 3, see fig. 4, paragraphs 0032, 0038 and 0045). Yin discloses a breathing tube (14 connected between 21 and 7/20, see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above and paragraph 0038) connected to the mask portion and configured to supply the breathing gas to the mask system (see fig. 4 and paragraph 0038), wherein the supply connector (connector formed by 21, fig. 4) is connected to the breathing tube such that the breathing gas is supplied to the diffuser and the goggles as the de-misting gas (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, as shown, the supply connector 21 is connected to the breathing tube that is directly connected to 7, furthermore, this configuration still allows the breathing gas to be supplied to diffuser and the goggles as the de-misting gas via the de-mist tube, see paragraph 0038).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the de-misting system and the goggles of Wu to be attached to a mask portion and to be part of a mask system comprising the breathing hose connected to the mask portion and a gas source as taught by Yin for the purpose of providing a system that protects the user’s respiratory system from foreign contaminants and at the same time providing protection to the eyes of the user, while providing a clear vision (see paragraphs 0041-0042 of Yin).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Wu discloses that the orifice is a first harness point, wherein the goggles further comprise a second harness point, and wherein the de-misting system further comprises a vent coupled to the second harness point for exhausting the de-misting gas from the interior volume of the goggles (see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above, the first harness point is the point at the orifice of the goggles that allowed fluid to be moved into the diffuser 140 of Wu, the point is a harness point because it is a point that allows gas to be harnessed/collected and expelled through the diffuser, furthermore, the second harness point is the orifice that couples to 121 or 300 on 120, which is a harness point because the second point allows the gas/mist to be harnessed and sucked out of the interior chamber, the vent is the fog outlet 121, see paragraph 0045, 0047 and 0051 of Wu).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Wu discloses a mask portion for receiving a breathing gas (mask portion is 18 comprising 8 and chamber 3, see fig. 4, paragraphs 0032, 0038 and 0045 of Yin).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Wu discloses an oral-nasal vent (the vent defined as valve 20 of Yin, fig. 4 and paragraph 0038 of Yin) between the mask portion and the goggles (see fig. 4 of Yin, relatively, the vent 20 of Yin is between the mask portion 18 and the goggles), and wherein the de-misting system further comprises an intra-mask plug configured to the an oral-nasal vent (see paragraph 0038 of Yin, Yin discloses that 20 is a one-way valve for air inlet 7, which would have a plug to allow the valve to be a one-way valve).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Yin (CN 111317935) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yin (CN 111317935) in view of Wu (CN 111743690).
Regarding claim 17, Yin discloses that the de-misting system comprises a supply connector (see the connector formed by 21, see fig. 4, paragraph 0038), a diffuser (see valve 19 and 27 at 9, fig. 4, paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0038, the one way valve acts a diffuser because it allows the opening and closing of the orifice, to flow through a check valve, the valve must allow for the closed position to take place during equalization of pressure on both side, once the valve is open, the valve is acting as a diffuser to diffuse through the valve since the gas leaving the valve would be spread out) attached to the first harness point (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, the harness point is the orifice as explained in the rejection to claim 16); and a de-mist tube (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above with reference to 14, paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0038) connecting the supply connector with the diffuser (fig. 4).
However, if there is any doubt that the valve 19 of Yin is a diffuser.
Wu teaches a de-misting system for goggles (entire system in fig. 1), the de-misting system comprising: a supply connector (201, see fig. 1, paragraphs 0013-0014, 0041 and 0048 of the English translation) connectable to a de-misting gas source (400 comprising 200, fig. 1, paragraphs 0047-0050); a de-mist tube (the tube between 122 and 201, see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above) in fluid communication with the supply connector (see fig. 1, paragraphs 0047-0050); and diffusers (140 on each side having diffusion port 141, fig. 2, paragraphs 0041 and 0048-0049) in fluid communication with the de-mist tube (figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 0047-0050), wherein the diffuser is configured to couple to an orifice of the goggles to supply a de-misting gas to an interior volume of the goggles (see figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 0048-0049, the orifice is the opening that formed on the cover 120 that allows fluid communication between the diffuser 140 and the supply tube, see clean air inlet 122 in paragraphs 0047-0048).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve 19 of Yin to be connected to a diffuser as taught by Wu for the purpose of distributing air evenly across the goggles, thereby preventing fogging that would affect the vision of the wearer (see paragraph 0049 of Wu).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (CN 111317935) alternatively in view of Wu (CN 111743690) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Cunningham (2013/0340152).
Regarding claim 14, Yin or the modified Yin discloses a breathing tube (14 connected between 21 and 7/20 of Yin, see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above and paragraph 0038 of Yin) connected to the mask portion and configured to supply the breathing gas to the mask system (see fig. 4 and paragraph 0038, the breathing gas is the gas from the environment being pumped to 21 and the de-mister tube and the breathing tube), wherein the supply connector (connector formed by 21, fig. 4 of Yin) is connected to the breathing tube such that the breathing gas is supplied to the diffuser and the goggles as the de-misting gas (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, as shown, the supply connector 21 is connected to the breathing tube that is directly connected to 7, furthermore, this configuration still allows the breathing gas to be supplied to diffuser and the goggles as the de-misting gas via the de-mist tube, see paragraph 0038 of Yin), but fails to disclose that the breathing tube is a breathing hose.
However, Cunningham teaches a hose (25, figs. 3-4, paragraphs 0023-0026 and 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the de-mist tube and the breathing tube of Yin or the modified Yin to be a hose as taught by Cunningham for the purpose of providing flexibility therefore, providing ease of manipulating the mask system relative to the gas source (paragraphs 0023-0026 and 0029 of Cunningham).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (CN 111317935) alternatively in view of Wu (CN 111743690) as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Cunningham (2013/0340152).
Regarding claim 18, Yin or the modified Yin discloses a mask portion (18 comprising 8 and chamber 3, see fig. 7, paragraphs 0032, 0038 and 0045 of Yin), a breathing tube (14 connected between 21 and 7/20, see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above and paragraph 0038) connected to the mask portion and configured to supply the breathing gas to the mask system (see fig. 4 and paragraph 0038, the breathing gas is the gas from the environment being pumped to 21 and the de-mister tube and the breathing tube), wherein the supply connector (connector formed by 21, fig. 4) is connected to the breathing tube such that at least some of the breathing gas is supplied to the interior volume as the de-misting gas (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, as shown, the supply connector 21 is connected to the breathing tube that is directly connected to 7, furthermore, this configuration still allows the breathing gas to be supplied to diffuser and the goggles as the de-misting gas via the de-mist tube, see paragraph 0038 of Yin), but fails to disclose that the breathing tube is a breathing hose.
However, Cunningham teaches a hose (25, figs. 3-4, paragraphs 0023-0026 and 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the de-mist tube and the breathing tube of Yin or the modified Yin to be a hose as taught by Cunningham for the purpose of providing flexibility therefore, providing ease of manipulating the mask system relative to the gas source (paragraphs 0023-0026 and 0029 of Cunningham).
Claims 1, 4-7, 9, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Yin (CN 111317935) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yin (CN 111317935) in view of Wu (CN 111743690).
PNG
media_image3.png
1024
928
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
967
831
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Yin discloses a de-misting system for goggles (entire system in fig. 7 minus the goggles, see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above, see paragraphs 0041 and 0045, Yin discloses a protective goggles), the de-misting system comprising: a supply connector (see the connector formed by 21, see fig. 7, paragraph 0038 of the English translation) connectable to a de-misting gas source (15, 34, 16, 17 and 18 adjacent to 17, fig. 7, paragraphs 0036 and 0045); a de-mist tube (see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above with reference to 14, paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0038) in fluid communication with the supply connector (see fig. 7); and a diffuser (see valve 19 and 27 at 9, fig. 7, paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0038, the one way valve acts a diffuser because it allows the opening and closing of the orifice, to flow through a check valve, the valve must allow for the closed position to take place during equalization of pressure on both side, once the valve is open, the valve is acting as a diffuser to diffuse through the valve since the gas leaving the valve would be spread out) in fluid communication with the de-mist tube (see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above), wherein the diffuser is configured to couple to a harness point of the goggles to supply a de-misting gas to an interior volume of the goggles (see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above with the annotated-Yin fig. 6 for reference, the location where the diffuser is being coupled to the goggles is a first harness point because the point allows gas/air to be harness and released via the valve 10 of the diffuser, alternatively, the first harness point can be treated as where the goggles are attached to the fixing strap 11 at a first side, since the diffuser is coupled to the goggles and the goggles are coupled to the harness 11 at the first harness point, the diffuser is being coupled to the first harness point indirectly, it is noted that the claim does not claim that the diffuser is directly couple to the first harness point, see paragraphs 0007 and 0032, see figs. 1 and 6 for reference) (see paragraphs 0010, 0016, 0033-0038 and 0045).
However, if there is any doubt that the valve 19 of Yin is a diffuser.
Wu teaches a de-misting system for goggles (entire system in fig. 1), the de-misting system comprising: a supply connector (201, see fig. 1, paragraphs 0013-0014, 0041 and 0048 of the English translation) connectable to a de-misting gas source (400 comprising 200, fig. 1, paragraphs 0047-0050); a de-mist tube (the tube between 122 and 201, see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above) in fluid communication with the supply connector (see fig. 1, paragraphs 0047-0050); and diffusers (140 on each side having diffusion port 141, fig. 2, paragraphs 0041 and 0048-0049) in fluid communication with the de-mist tube (figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 0047-0050), wherein the diffuser is configured to couple to an orifice of the goggles to supply a de-misting gas to an interior volume of the goggles (see figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 0048-0049, the orifice is the opening that formed on the cover 120 that allows fluid communication between the diffuser 140 and the supply tube, see clean air inlet 122 in paragraphs 0047-0048).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve 19 of Yin to be connected to a diffuser as taught by Wu for the purpose of distributing air evenly across the goggles, thereby preventing fogging that would affect the vision of the wearer (see paragraph 0049 of Wu).
Regarding claim 4, Yin or the modified Yin discloses that a vent for exhausting the de-misting gas from the interior volume of the goggles, wherein the vent is configured to couple to a second harness point of the goggles (see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above, the first harness point is where valve 19 is connected to the goggle, and the second harness point is where valve 23 is connected to the goggles, both points allow air to be harness and escaped, alternatively, see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above with the annotated-Yin fig. 6 for reference, the second harness point can be treated as where the goggles are attached to the fixing strap 11 at a second side, since the diffuser is coupled to the goggles and the goggles are coupled to the harness 11 at the second harness point, the diffuser is being coupled to the second harness point indirectly, it is noted that the claim does not claim that the diffuser is directly couple to the second harness point, see paragraphs 0007 and 0032, see figs. 1 and 6 for reference) (see paragraphs 0010, 0016, 0033-0038 and 0045).
Regarding claim 5, Yin or the modified Yin discloses that the vent is configured to couple to the second harness point of the goggles opposite from the first harness point of the goggles (see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above, the first harness point is where valve 19 is connected to the goggle, and the second harness point is where valve 23 is connected to the goggles, both points allow air to be harness and escaped, alternatively see the first and second harness points in the annotated-Yin fig. 6 above and the explanation in the rejections for claims 1 and 4 above, the alternatively harness points are also opposite of one another).
Regarding claim 6, Yin or the modified Yin discloses that the vent further comprises a check valve (check valve 23 of Yin, fig. 7 and paragraphs 0042-0043 of Yin).
Regarding claim 7, Yin or the modified Yin discloses that the diffuser further comprises a check valve (see check valve 19, fig. 7 and paragraph 0038 of Yin).
Regarding claim 9, Yin or the modified Yin discloses an intra-mask plug configured to block an oral-nasal vent of the goggles (see the plug of valve 23 at outlet 10, fig. 7, paragraphs 0041-0042 of Yin, a one way valve is designed to be closed in one direction, therefore, would have a plug to block an oral-nasal vent of the goggles).
Regarding claim 11, Yin or the modified Yin discloses a mask system (entire system in fig. 7) comprising: the goggles (see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above, see paragraphs 0041 and 0045, Yin discloses a protective goggles) further comprising a lens defining the interior volume and the de-misting system of claim 1, wherein the diffuser is coupled to the first harness point of the goggles (see paragraphs 0032-0042 and 0045 of Yin, and see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above, the location where the diffuser is couple to the goggles is a harness point because the point allows gas/air to be harness and released via the valve 10 of the diffuser of Yin, alternatively see the alternative first harness point in the annotated-Yin fig. 6 above).
Regarding claim 12, Yin or the modified Yin discloses that wherein the goggles further comprise a second harness point, and wherein the de-misting system further comprises a vent coupled to the second harness point for exhausting the de-misting gas from the interior volume of the goggles (the vent is defined as 10/23/31/ 28 in fig. 7, paragraphs 0041-0042 of Yin, the valve 23 is configured to exhaust the de-misting gas from the interior volume of the goggles into the chamber 3 of the face mask formed by 18, the second harness point is where the valve 23 is positioned, it is a harness point because the point allows air to be harness from the interior of the goggle to the interior of the mask, alternatively, see the annotated-Yin fig. 7 above with the annotated-Yin fig. 6 for reference, the second harness point can be treated as where the goggles are attached to the fixing strap 11 at a second side, since the diffuser is coupled to the goggles and the goggles are coupled to the harness 11 at the second harness point, the diffuser is being coupled to the second harness point indirectly, it is noted that the claim does not claim that the diffuser is directly couple to the second harness point, see paragraphs 0007 and 0032, see figs. 1 and 6 for reference) (see paragraphs 0010, 0016, 0033-0038 and 0045).
Regarding claim 13, Yin or the modified Yin discloses a mask portion (18 comprising 8 and chamber 3, see fig. 7, paragraphs 0032, 0038 and 0045 of Yin).
Regarding claim 15, Yin or the modified Yin discloses an oral-nasal vent (the vent is defined as 10/23/31/ 28 in fig. 7, paragraphs 0041-0042 of Yin, the valve 23 is configured to exhaust the de-misting gas from the interior volume of the goggles into the chamber 3 of the face mask formed by 18) between the mask portion and the goggles, and wherein the de-misting system further comprises an intra-mask plug configured to the oral-nasal vent (see the plug of valve 23 at outlet 10, fig. 7, paragraphs 0041-0042 of Yin, a one way valve is designed to be closed in one direction, therefore, would have a plug to block an oral-nasal vent of the goggles).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (CN 111743690) in view of Cunningham (2013/0340152).
Regarding claim 20, Wu discloses a method for attaching a de-misting system (entire system in fig. 1 minus the goggles (100, 110, 120)) to existing goggles (see paragraphs 0045 and fig. 1, Wu discloses that the de-misting system is connected to the goggles (100, 110, and 120), to attach the de-misting system to goggles, the goggles must be an existing goggles, see paragraphs 0045-0051), comprising attaching a supply connector (201, see fig. 1, paragraphs 0013-0014, 0041 and 0048 of the English translation) to a breathing tube (see the another tube, fig. 1, paragraph 0048, the three way connector 201 is attached to the breathing tube, to be connected, there would be a step of attaching the two together), attaching a diffuser to a first harness point of the goggles (see paragraphs 0045 and 0048-0049, Wu discloses that connection of the diffuser to the harness point (point at the inlet 122) that is connected to 140, for the two to be connected, there must be a step of attaching, furthermore, the point is a harness point in that the point allows air/gas to be collected and passed through and spread out within the interior chamber, therefore, the point of collection is a harness point, alternatively, the harness point can be where the harness 130 is attached to 120, and when the goggles is being attached to the diffuser, the harness point would be indirectly attached to the diffuser); and attaching a de-mist tube to the supply connector and the diffuser (see paragraphs 0045 and 0048-0049, Wu discloses that the de-mist tube is connected to the supply connector and the diffuser, therefore, there would be a step of connecting the de-mist tube to the supply connector 201 and diffuser 140), but fails to disclose that the breathing tube is a hose.
However, Cunningham teaches a hose (25, figs. 3-4, paragraphs 0023-0026 and 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the de-mist tube and the breathing tube of Wu to be a hose as taught by Cunningham for the purpose of providing flexibility therefore, providing ease of manipulating the mask system relative to the gas source (paragraphs 0023-0026 and 0029 of Cunningham).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (CN 111317935) in view of Cunningham (2013/0340152) and alternatively in view of Wu (CN 111743690).
Regarding claim 20, Yin discloses a method for attaching a de-misting system (entire system in fig. 4 minus the goggles, see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, see paragraphs 0041 and 0045, Yin discloses a protective goggles) to existing goggles (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, see paragraphs 0041 and 0045, Yin discloses a protective goggles, Yin discloses connecting the inlet 9 of the goggles to the ventilation device of the de-misting system, therefore, for the goggles to be attached to the de-misting system, the goggles must be an existing goggles, see paragraphs 0032, 0033, 0036 and 0052), comprising: attaching a supply connector (21, fig. 4) to a breathing tube (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, see paragraph 0038, Yin discloses that the buffer chamber 21 which is a connector is connected to the air supply duct 14, which would have the step of attaching the supply connector to the breathing tube 14 connecting the mask portion to 21); attaching a diffuser (see valve 19 and 27 at 9, fig. 4, paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0038, the one way valve acts a diffuser because it allows the opening and closing of the orifice, to flow through a check valve, the valve must allow for the closed position to take place during equalization of pressure on both side, once the valve is open, the valve is acting as a diffuser to diffuse through the valve since the gas leaving the valve would be spread out) to a first harness point of the goggles (see the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above, the harness point is the point where the orifice meet with the valve 19, the point is a harness point because it allows gas to be harnessed and pushed through the valve to be within the interior chamber of the goggles); and attaching a de-mist tube (see portion of 14 in the annotated-Yin fig. 4 above) to the supply connector and the diffuser (see paragraphs 0032, 0036, and 0038), but fails to disclose that the breathing tube is a breathing hose.
However, Cunningham teaches a hose (25, figs. 3-4, paragraphs 0023-0026 and 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the de-mist tube and the breathing tube of Yin to be a hose as taught by Cunningham for the purpose of providing flexibility therefore, providing ease of manipulating the mask system relative to the gas source (paragraphs 0023-0026 and 0029 of Cunningham).
However, if there is any doubt that the valve 19 of Yin is a diffuser.
Wu teaches a de-misting system for goggles (entire system in fig. 1), the de-misting system comprising: a supply connector (201, see fig. 1, paragraphs 0013-0014, 0041 and 0048 of the English translation) connectable to a de-misting gas source (400 comprising 200, fig. 1, paragraphs 0047-0050); a de-mist tube (the tube between 122 and 201, see the annotated-Wu fig. 1 above) in fluid communication with the supply connector (see fig. 1, paragraphs 0047-0050); and diffusers (140 on each side having diffusion port 141, fig. 2, paragraphs 0041 and 0048-0049) in fluid communication with the de-mist tube (figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 0047-0050), wherein the diffuser is configured to couple to an orifice of the goggles to supply a de-misting gas to an interior volume of the goggles (see figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 0048-0049, the orifice is the opening that formed on the cover 120 that allows fluid communication between the diffuser 140 and the supply tube, see clean air inlet 122 in paragraphs 0047-0048).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve 19 of Yin to be connected to a diffuser as taught by Wu for the purpose of distributing air evenly across the goggles, thereby preventing fogging that would affect the vision of the wearer (see paragraph 0049 of Wu).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 2/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant on pages 8-11 of the remarks argues that the Examiner defines the harness point in multiple instances throughout the Office Action as “the point that allows gas to be harnessed/collected and expelled through the diffuser,”, “the point where gas enter the goggles from the first orifice since gas is being harness[ed] into a location to be released from the tube and orifice to the interior”, and “both [harness] points allow air to be harness and escaped”. Applicant respectfully submits the term “harness point” is not any point where air is “harnessed” into the goggles but rather points where “the harness 108 may be affixed to the goggles 106” as defined in the specification of the present application. Applicant as filed, paragraph [0030]. While terms are afforded their broadest reasonable interpretation and the term harness can mean “to tie together” or “utilize”, claim terms must be read in light of the specification. Considering the specification, it is clear that the term harness point is a point where “the harness 108 may be affixed to the goggles 106”. Thus, given the currently amended claims and the correct definition of the term “harness point,” the art of the record fails to anticipate, teach, or suggest the de-misting system of the present application. The applicant further explain how each reference of the references Wu, Yin, Xie and Cunningham fail to disclose the harness point as defined by the specification. However, the argument is not persuasive because the specification fails to provide any special definition for the term “harness point” to mean a point where the harness is attached to the googles or that the harness point can’t be the harness point as interpreted and explained by the Examiner in the Non-final rejection. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “it is clear that the term harness point is a point where ‘the harness 108 may be affixed to the goggles 106’”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Therefore, the rejection still stands.
The arguments to the newly added claim limitations in claim 1 and 3-20 has been addressed in the above rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TU A VO whose telephone number is (571)270-1045. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Timothy Stanis can be reached at (571)272-5139. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TU A VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights